Decoding Gender Portrayal in Media: From Stereotypes to Reality

Media is everywhere – in the shows we binge, the news we scroll through, the ads we barely notice. And within all of it, gender is constantly being portrayed in specific ways. Sometimes these portrayals reflect reality. More often, they don’t. The gap between how men and women actually live and how media represents them is one of the most well-documented problems in communication studies. Understanding this gap – who gets shown, how they’re shown, and who gets left out entirely – is essential for anyone studying or consuming media today.

What are gender stereotypes in media? 🔗

A gender stereotype in media is an oversimplified, fixed idea about how men or women should look, behave, or what roles they should occupy. According to a peer-reviewed study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, gender stereotypes in media typically cover physical appearance, personality traits, behaviours, social roles, and occupations. These stereotypes can be descriptive (how people of a certain gender are perceived), prescriptive (how they should behave), or proscriptive (how they should not behave).

In practice, this means women in media are often shown as nurturing, emotional, domestic, and focused on appearance. Men are shown as dominant, aggressive, competent, and professional. While individual exceptions exist, the overall pattern across decades of content analysis remains remarkably consistent.

Women in traditional roles: the persistent pattern 🔗

One of the most enduring stereotypes in media is the placement of women in domestic or caregiving roles. Television advertisements are a clear example. Even in the 2020s, women are disproportionately shown in household settings – cleaning, cooking, or caring for children – while men are placed in professional or authoritative positions. As research compiled by the GSDRC (Governance, Social Development, Humanitarian and Conflict) notes, media professionals often reflect prevailing social and cultural norms, and their output reinforces those norms in a continuous loop.

In fictional narratives, this pattern runs deep. For decades, female characters in films and television shows were primarily defined by their relationships to male characters – as wives, girlfriends, mothers, or love interests. Their own goals, careers, or inner lives were secondary, if they existed at all. Writer Katha Pollitt coined the term “Smurfette Principle” in 1991 to describe a common pattern: a group of diverse male characters accompanied by a single, token female character who is defined mainly by her gender.

This extends to how women’s value is framed. A comprehensive overview of gender in media highlights that female characters are frequently introduced through their physical appearance, while male characters are introduced through their actions or professional roles. The underlying message is that a woman’s worth is tied to how she looks, while a man’s worth is tied to what he does.

The objectification problem 🔗

Closely linked to traditional role portrayals is sexual objectification – reducing women to their physical attributes for the viewer’s consumption. Research consistently shows that women in media are far more likely than men to be shown in sexually revealing clothing, to have the camera linger on their bodies, and to be valued primarily for their attractiveness. The Geena Davis Institute’s 2024 Family Film Study found that even in films rated G, PG, and PG-13, female characters were nearly five times more likely to be objectified than male characters and three times more likely to wear sexually revealing clothing.

This is significant because family films shape how children understand gender from a very young age. If young audiences consistently see women valued for appearance and men valued for competence, these ideas become normalised before children are old enough to question them.

The Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media: key findings 🔗

Founded in 2004 by Academy Award-winning actor Geena Davis, the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media is the only global research-based organisation working to increase on-screen representation across gender, race, LGBTQIA+ identity, disability, age, and body type. Its guiding philosophy is straightforward: “If she can see it, she can be it.”

The Institute’s research has produced some of the most cited data on gender representation in entertainment media. Here are some of their landmark findings:

Screen time disparity: Using their Inclusion Quotient software – developed in partnership with USC’s Signal Analysis and Interpretation Laboratory – the Institute found that in films released between 2014 and 2015, male characters appeared on screen roughly twice as often as female characters. By 2019, representation in children’s television had reached approximate parity, with female roles slightly exceeding male ones.

The 2024 Film Study: Analysing 82 family films from 2023, the study revealed that female characters still made up only 37.8% of all characters on screen. Only 35.3% of lead roles were female. While nearly 75% of the films passed the Bechdel Test (requiring at least two named female characters who talk to each other about something other than a man), the overall numbers show that women remain underrepresented in the stories told to families and children.

STEM representation: A 2024 report titled “Portray Her 2.0” found that male STEM characters on screen still outnumber female ones, even though 71% of young women aged 11-24 said it’s important to see women in STEM roles in media. This matters because on-screen role models directly influence career aspirations, particularly for girls considering fields in science and technology.

Women as news subjects: findings from the Global Media Monitoring Project 🔗

While the Geena Davis Institute focuses on entertainment, the Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) tracks gender in news media. Coordinated by the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC), the GMMP is the world’s largest and longest-running study of gender in news – conducted every five years since 1995 across more than 120 countries.

The GMMP 2025 findings, released in September 2025, paint a sobering picture. Thirty years after the Beijing Platform for Action called for transformative change in how media treats women, progress has effectively stalled.

Key findings from GMMP 2025 🔗

Women make up just 26% of news subjects and sources – the people seen, heard, or spoken about in print, broadcast, and online news. This represents only a nine-percentage-point increase over 30 years of monitoring. The GMMP 2025 Highlights report notes that progress began to flatline around 2010, with only a two-point rise in women’s visibility in the last 15 years.

Men dominate as experts and spokespersons. When women do appear in news stories, they are more often quoted as eyewitnesses providing personal accounts rather than as subject-matter experts – even when they have the relevant qualifications. Men continue to hold positions of authority in news narratives across every topic area.

Gender-based violence receives minimal coverage. Despite being a widespread human rights issue, stories about gender-based violence made up less than 2% of all news coverage monitored globally. This means the issue most directly affecting women’s safety is barely visible in the media landscape.

Women reporters have increased, but gaps remain. Women now make up about 41% of reporters in traditional news, up from 28% in 1995. However, the stories women report are more likely to feature female sources and subjects, meaning the overall imbalance is partly structural – tied to who is doing the reporting and the editorial decisions around story assignments.

Anti-stereotype journalism is declining. Perhaps the most concerning finding is that journalism actively challenging gender stereotypes has reached its lowest level in the entire 30-year monitoring period. As the International Federation of Journalists noted, these results represent an urgent call for newsrooms to change mindsets and embed a genuine culture of gender equality.

Regional variations in news representation 🔗

The GMMP data also reveals significant regional differences. North American news media are closest to parity, with women making up about 40% of news subjects and sources. Asian and Middle Eastern media trail significantly, with women constituting only about 19% of those featured in news stories. European, African, and Latin American media fall somewhere in between, each with their own specific patterns and challenges.

These regional disparities reflect broader social, cultural, and political factors. In regions where women have greater participation in public life and politics, their visibility in news tends to be higher. But even in countries with relatively strong gender equality indicators, like Sweden (which had 38% women as news subjects in 2020, well above the global average), the question remains whether this progress will continue or plateau further.

How stereotypical media portrayals affect audiences 🔗

Gender representation in media is not just a matter of numbers. It has measurable real-world effects on how people think, behave, and see themselves.

Impact on children and young people 🔗

A review published in the Annual Review of Developmental Psychology summarising two decades of research (2000-2020) found a consistent association between frequent television viewing among children and adolescents and more stereotypical beliefs about gender. This included attitudes about gender roles, beliefs about the importance of appearance for girls and women, stereotyping of toys and occupations, and support for traditional sexual roles.

The Geena Davis Institute’s research on children’s media echoes this. Their See Jane 2024 report on children’s television found that male characters still outnumber female characters by over 13 percentage points in the most popular shows consumed by children aged 2-11 in the United States. When children grow up watching content where boys and men are more visible, more active, and more varied in their roles, it shapes their understanding of what’s possible for each gender.

Impact on adults and professional life 🔗

The effects don’t stop in childhood. Research on stereotype threat shows that when women are reminded of gender stereotypes – even subtly through media exposure – their performance in areas like maths, science, and leadership can be negatively affected. Women in male-dominated fields often experience additional self-doubt that can be traced back to societal stereotypes reinforced through media.

In newsrooms specifically, when women are consistently portrayed as personal-experience sources rather than experts, it reinforces the idea that authority and expertise are male qualities. This can influence hiring decisions, editorial choices, and the kinds of stories that get prioritised.

Men and stereotypes: the other side 🔗

It’s important to note that gender stereotyping in media affects men too. Male characters are frequently depicted as tough, aggressive, emotionally closed off, and dominant. As noted by the GSDRC, media tends to demean men in caring or domestic roles, leaving little room for alternative models of masculinity. A 2021 study of top-rated US sitcoms from 1980 to 2017 found that fathers were increasingly portrayed as incompetent parents – 56% of scenes in the 2010s depicted fathers as having poor parenting skills, compared to 18% in the 1980s.

These portrayals are harmful because they push both men and women toward narrow, unrealistic expectations. They tell men that vulnerability is weakness and tell women that ambition is unwelcome – and both messages limit human potential.

Signs of change and what lies ahead 🔗

There has been progress. According to a report by San Diego State University, 2024 was the first year in which there was an equal balance of male and female protagonists in film, both at 42%. The Geena Davis Institute’s development of Spellcheck for Bias – AI software that analyses screenplays for stereotypes – has been adopted by major studios including Disney and Universal. The LEGO Group changed its toy lineup in 2021 after research from the Institute highlighted gender stereotypes in children’s products.

In news media, the GMMP’s 30-year dataset provides a crucial accountability tool. Organisations like UN Women are actively using these findings to push for policy changes and editorial reforms globally.

But the data is also clear: change is slow, uneven, and far from guaranteed. At the current rate of progress, gender parity in news media could take more than 50 years. In entertainment, while female leads are increasing, supporting roles, speaking time, and the overall ecosystem of representation still reflect deep imbalances.

What do you think? When you watch your favourite show or read the news, do you notice patterns in how men and women are represented? And if media both reflects and shapes our reality, whose responsibility is it to push for more accurate, diverse portrayals – creators, audiences, or both?

References

1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10218532/
2. https://gsdrc.org/topic-guides/gender/gender-and-media/
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_and_gender
4. https://geenadavisinstitute.org/representation-in-family-films-2024-study-by-geena-davis-institute/
5. https://geenadavisinstitute.org/
6. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/geena-davis-institute-publishes-new-study-revealing-women-in-stem-are-underrepresented-in-tv-and-film-302060966.html
7. https://waccglobal.org/launch-of-gmmp-2025-global-report-to-present-landmark-30-year-findings-of-monitoring-gender-in-the-news/
8. https://whomakesthenews.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/GMMP2025-Highlights-Of-Findings-Report.pdf
9. https://www.ifj.org/media-centre/news/detail/category/gender-equality/article/women-account-for-only-26-of-news-subjects-according-to-global-report
10. https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-devpsych-051120-010630
11. https://www.unwomen.org/en/news-stories/press-release/2025/09/half-the-world-only-a-quarter-of-the-news